jb wrote:WTF do you expect him to do, OJ. Invade? With what? Wad's been shot. They already are sanctioned to the max and PNG in the international community. He can huff and puff but can't blow the house down.

If he even says anything, they Fox mediots will be all over him. If he says nothing, the Fox mediots will be all over him. None of it is issue focussed and we can't do shit about Iran. Iranians can, though.

I meant playing both sides of the fence in terms of his rhetoric. I'm not advocating any military action, well, nothing that would cause us to expend much in terms of resources. He makes it so you don't really know what side he is on. Are you supporting the people on the street, or the mullahs. He is tepid in his approach. In Iran it blew up in his face because the mullahs wouldn't fold.

In Egypt, initially he looked weak again, but then Mubarek, or probably more importantly, the military wasn't willing to go as far as Tehran.

As far as the talking heads? There is going to be noise no matter what you do, but when the correct path is chosen those supporting and giving kudos will drown out the "spinners". (Well unless your GWB )

Orenthal wrote: Oh, btw, why don't we invade there just to get things really interesting?

Operationally could we even piull that off/ I mean, I know we coul blow 'em away, but I doubt we could ever occupy.

What if we just took out the RG surgically? That is a pretty interestng thought...

If the streets erupt and the mullahs/RG put it down violently...??? Would be interesting. That pot commits you to "the street".

He certainly doesn't sound like "Black Bush", and I am not saying what he has done is utter failure, just saying it appears weak/wishy-washy/fence sitting. Of course its also a fluid situation and ever evolving.

Again very interesting.

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

Orenthal wrote:He certainly doesn't sound like "Black Bush", and I am not saying what he has done is utter failure, just saying it appears weak/wishy-washy/fence sitting.

I still think alot if not 100% is rhetorical. Other than taking out the RG's operational effectiveness unilaterally in a 48 hour unprovoked military action which would be the most ballsy move by a POTUS, um, ever, there's not much effective he can do. That said, it all goes back to being the pencil necked constitutional law scholar. Wonder what America would do if he just went all SL jackson out of nowhere. LOL.

More than enough that getting involved and hoping to instill a democracy won't fix em. It is a shame that Lara went there to do her job and then ends up becoming a victim of the violence. Personally I've never understood why so many reporters go to these places in the name of reporting news, when what goes on over in that part of the world is the farthest thing from "news" you can find.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

There's your ME "democracy" at work. If it weren't for my high opinion of Ziner and not wanting to be a dick, I'd ask rhetorically if that is just a bi-product of democracy's messiness, sort of like our own. But I like dude too much.

Bottom line: They aren't us. You just can't project our values on them.

jb wrote:There's your ME "democracy" at work. If it weren't for my high opinion of Ziner and not wanting to be a dick, I'd ask rhetorically if that is just a bi-product of democracy's messiness, sort of like our own. But I like dude too much.

Bottom line: They aren't us. You just can't project our values on them.

Oh come on, when has anything stoped you from being a dick? Would you like me to google the number of women raped or gang raped in this country?

The initial tweet by Rosen stated, “Lara Logan had to outdo Anderson. Where was her buddy McCrystal.” From this tweet he went further, writing that he would have been amused if Anderson Cooper had also been sexually assaulted.

“Yes yes its wrong what happened to her. Of course. I don’t support that. But, it would have been funny if it happened to Anderson too,” wrote Rosen.

The two comments gave way to more. Rosen called Logan a “war monger” and expressed doubt that she was actually assaulted.

“Jesus Christ, at a moment when she is going to become a martyr and glorified we should at least remember her role as a major war monger” wrote Rosen.

“Look, she was probably groped like thousands of other women, which is still wrong, but if it was worse than [sic] I’m sorry.”

Then came a quasi-apology by Rosen: “ah fuck it, I apologize for being insensitive, it’s always wrong, that’s obvious, but I’m rolling my eyes at all the attention she will get.”

Didn't take long to politicize the most horrific 30 minutes of that woman's life. Not here and not on the interwebs in general.

We might like to think we're above it but it sure looks like a microcosm of real life right here.

Which is nice.

And WE ARE a lot more civilized here: these things happen at music festivals, not right there at political rallys. Savages.

And Donny, while I agree with your basic decree and that the act is reprehensible it's not always been seen that way. There have, however, been some better excuses made for it than dragging a cave-woman back to one's lair to propagate the species.

Like this for instance, from a civilized, christian group: jus primae noctis

You know what Ziner? I agree that this Rosen guy is a douche of epic proportions based on those tweets.

But why is it "gotta love liberals"? Like his being a liberal or a democrat is what makes him an asshole. Even in the story you quoted it's "left-wing journalist." As if it's a dirty word or something, being "left-wing".

Can't an asshole just be an asshole without implying that his political affiliation is what caused said assholery?

In other words, if the guy that made those tweets was a Fox news correspondant and Hannity's golf buddy, would you have written "gotta love conservatives" and called him a "right-wing journalist"?

Look Ziner, doesn't intent count for anything at all? I'm just not returning fire on that shit.

Here's my point. I do see this through the lens of a socialtal microcasm when a politicized mob perpetrates such a crime. This wasn't a sexual crime. It was not a random spur of the moement act in a vacuum of a universal humal condition. It was a crime of politicized violence by the very nature of it's disgusting details. The chants of "jew, jew" and the spy accusations. This was male mob violence aganist a professional western women who didn't know her place. And for fuck's sake this is not GOP vs Dem.

But the centerpiece is where the definition of "democracy" comes from in a current sense. I see it as far more than the right to vote. I see it as a manefestation of western political philosophy that was part and parcel with age of enlightenment social philosophy. They aren't there. I doubt they ever will be there. But if they do get there, it will not be becasue of anything a western power can do about it.

Rosen is a prick, Hiko. he had a personal axe to grind over lara's defense of McCrystal. Proof twitter is for twits. I know you know this and this is your way of taking a shot at me, ironically not a "Liberal" as defined olitically w/ a cap L.

And Brian, I get the "too soon" angle. I will not get into that with you. But this is a political matter by the very nature of the who, what, when and where. To deny so is just not a realistic proposition -- amorally. This will swing US public opinion.

Y'all have a good one.

Last edited by jb on Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

motherscratcher wrote:You know what Ziner? I agree that this Rosen guy is a douche of epic proportions based on those tweets.

But why is it "gotta love liberals"? Like his being a liberal or a democrat is what makes him an asshole. Even in the story you quoted it's "left-wing journalist." As if it's a dirty word or something, being "left-wing".

Can't an asshole just be an asshole without implying that his political affiliation is what caused said assholery?

In other words, if the guy that made those tweets was a Fox news correspondant and Hannity's golf buddy, would you have written "gotta love conservatives" and called him a "right-wing journalist"?

Mother, god damn you, it was in jest. But you also clearly demonstrated my point to JB. Clearly I don't think all liberals mock rape, but clearly JB thinks that all Egyptians are rapid beasts that will rape women. Don't judge the many by the few. It was part of my point, sorry if that wasn't clear.

motherscratcher wrote:You know what Ziner? I agree that this Rosen guy is a douche of epic proportions based on those tweets.

But why is it "gotta love liberals"? Like his being a liberal or a democrat is what makes him an asshole. Even in the story you quoted it's "left-wing journalist." As if it's a dirty word or something, being "left-wing".

Can't an asshole just be an asshole without implying that his political affiliation is what caused said assholery?

In other words, if the guy that made those tweets was a Fox news correspondant and Hannity's golf buddy, would you have written "gotta love conservatives" and called him a "right-wing journalist"?

Mother, god damn you, it was in jest. But you also clearly demonstrated my point to JB. Clearly I don't think all liberals mock rape, but clearly JB thinks that all Egyptians are rapid beasts that will rape women. Don't judge the many by the few. It was part of my point, sorry if that wasn't clear.

Straight up no spin.

Lara is covering a French strike and mass protest over the retirement welfare age. There's fighting in the street w/ cops. Or the usual banal violence when the G 8 goes anywhere, but let's say it is Copenhagen.

jb wrote:Look Ziner, doesn't intent count for anything at all? I'm just not returning fire on that shit.

Here's my point. I do see this through the lens of a socialtal microcasm when a politicized mob perpetrates such a crime. This wasn't a sexual crime. It was not a random spur of the moement act in a vacuum of a universal humal condition. It was a crime of politicized violence by the very nature of it's disgusting details. The chants of "jew, jew" and the spy accusations. This was male mob violence aganist a professional western women who didn't know her place. And for fuck's sake this is not GOP vs Dem.

But the centerpiece is where the definition of "democracy" comes from in a current sense. I see it as far more than the right to vote. I see it as a manefestation of western political philosophy that was part and parcel with age of enlightenment social philosophy. They aren't there. I doubt they ever will be there. But if they do get there, it will not be becasue of anything a western power can do about it.

Rosen is a prick, Hiko. he had a personal axe to grind over lara's defense of McCrystal. Proof twitter is for twits. I know you know this and this is your way of taking a shot at me, ironically not a "Liberal" as defined olitically w/ a cap L.

And Brian, I get the "too soon" angle. I will not get into that with you. But this is a political matter by the very nature of the who, what, when and where. To deny so is just not a realistic proposition -- amorally. This will swing US public opinion.

Y'all have a good one.

Chanting "jew jew" to me is no different than a bunch of hillbillies in the south beating a African-American while chanting "nigger nigger". That happens and has happened. Remember our messy democracy that had a civil war over the slavery, if not more grotesque than rape, it is close. They are centuries behind us, because they protested and now have a "democracy" does not mean they are brought back to the 21st century. You gotta cut the majority a break here, this shit takes time. It certainly isn't fool proof and I see your point, there is a very good chance this does dick to bring progress to them, but it isnt like we could have stopped it so lets try to make it work.

jb wrote:Look Ziner, doesn't intent count for anything at all? I'm just not returning fire on that shit.

Here's my point. I do see this through the lens of a socialtal microcasm when a politicized mob perpetrates such a crime. This wasn't a sexual crime. It was not a random spur of the moement act in a vacuum of a universal humal condition. It was a crime of politicized violence by the very nature of it's disgusting details. The chants of "jew, jew" and the spy accusations. This was male mob violence aganist a professional western women who didn't know her place. And for fuck's sake this is not GOP vs Dem.

But the centerpiece is where the definition of "democracy" comes from in a current sense. I see it as far more than the right to vote. I see it as a manefestation of western political philosophy that was part and parcel with age of enlightenment social philosophy. They aren't there. I doubt they ever will be there. But if they do get there, it will not be becasue of anything a western power can do about it.

Rosen is a prick, Hiko. he had a personal axe to grind over lara's defense of McCrystal. Proof twitter is for twits. I know you know this and this is your way of taking a shot at me, ironically not a "Liberal" as defined olitically w/ a cap L.

And Brian, I get the "too soon" angle. I will not get into that with you. But this is a political matter by the very nature of the who, what, when and where. To deny so is just not a realistic proposition -- amorally. This will swing US public opinion.

Y'all have a good one.

Chanting "jew jew" to me is no different than a bunch of hillbillies in the south beating a African-American while chanting "nigger nigger". That happens and has happened. Remember our messy democracy that had a civil war over the slavery, if not more grotesque than rape, it is close. They are centuries behind us, because they protested and now have a "democracy" does not mean they are brought back to the 21st century. You gotta cut the majority a break here, this shit takes time. It certainly isn't fool proof and I see your point, there is a very good chance this does dick to bring progress to them, but it isnt like we could have stopped it so lets try to make it work.

They probably will need something akin to a civil war, if not an actual civil war, between the secular and the islamist there to evolve socially/culturally for real democracy. But not from us. That said, I can't argue with your "give it time". Give a room full of monkey's a typewriter, ribbon and paper and eventuallly they write war and Peace.

And this attitude comes largely from Peeker's philosophy about help someone once, OK. On the dole? No thank you. F U very much. That's how I see this on a global scale; just for oil, which could be a replaceable commodity. And lastly, I do NOT believe in cultural relativism carte blanch. Not in this day and age of globalism.

motherscratcher wrote:You know what Ziner? I agree that this Rosen guy is a douche of epic proportions based on those tweets.

But why is it "gotta love liberals"? Like his being a liberal or a democrat is what makes him an asshole. Even in the story you quoted it's "left-wing journalist." As if it's a dirty word or something, being "left-wing".

Can't an asshole just be an asshole without implying that his political affiliation is what caused said assholery?

In other words, if the guy that made those tweets was a Fox news correspondant and Hannity's golf buddy, would you have written "gotta love conservatives" and called him a "right-wing journalist"?

Mother, god damn you, it was in jest. But you also clearly demonstrated my point to JB. Clearly I don't think all liberals mock rape, but clearly JB thinks that all Egyptians are rapid beasts that will rape women. Don't judge the many by the few. It was part of my point, sorry if that wasn't clear.

Straight up no spin.

Lara is covering a French strike and mass protest over the retirement welfare age. There's fighting in the street w/ cops. Or the usual banal violence when the G 8 goes anywhere, but let's say it is Copenhagen.

Does this have any chance of happening s it did?.

You give the lowest of us too much credit. If this becomes a daily occurrence you win, until then I will just continue to show how civilized we are.

Look I have virtually zero respect for life over there in regards to how it is presented to us over here, but I have to go with Ziner's point on this, that the horrible crime committed against Lara was more so due to the circumstances and the surrounding mob mentality (due in its own right to the revolution), b/c frankly if it wasn't she would have been raped dozens of times over there already. To my knowledge she has never been raped before (while being over there), and I don't think it can be chalked up to her kind of sort of being from that part of the world.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

jb wrote:And Brian, I get the "too soon" angle. I will not get into that with you. But this is a political matter by the very nature of the who, what, when and where. To deny so is just not a realistic proposition -- amorally. This will swing US public opinion.

Y'all have a good one.

I understand it's a political issue. It's just unsettling to me to me that it immediately invokes partisan opinions.

Always seems no one on either side is wrong and, worse yet, it should be simple, straight forward and easy for the other side to understand. The fact they can't makes them less intelligent and/or relevant politically.

Y'all clearly have defined beliefs and positions. They're on opposite sides of the political fence. You're both intelligent dudes. But I'll say it again, everyone is screaming over the din.

Honestly, this is exactly the reason I stay out of this forum for the most part and out of politics publicly. Two people who can agree on most things can't seem to listen. It's just always loud. And at some point people look to the extreme to paint someone else's view points and lift their own. Just never seems to lead anywhere.

Microcosm.

Sorry, not trying to dissuade people from conversation or be a pollyanna. Just think that conversation actually takes listening and accommodation and that doesn't appear possible re: politics.

Incorrect, JB is clearly on the fence. He is a centrist. Right in the middle of Maddow and Olbermann.

Everyone else is nut jobs.

Seriously though, I wasn't even trying to make it political, just trying to jab JB and his centrist views. I have hardly envoked Obama's name when he comes to this entire thing other than I hope he can help nudge them down the democracy road and that someone pro to neutral America end up in charge. This entire thread to me is very little about politics. The rape was just my way in jest to poke liberals and present to JB the dangers of judging groups of people on one action.

Rape is a universal human evil that crosses national and cultural boundaries.

So is jew-hatred.

That said, JB is right I think, that something about Arab (Muslim?)culture is perhaps uniquely capable of bringing a public, gang-involved incident like this about. (I must admit to not having read all the details yet)

Though maybe Copenhagen is not the best example of a place where it couldn't/wouldn't happen...such is the state of Muslim immigration (and their segregation among the populace), Islamic culture and jew-hatred (which of course is not the exclusive preserve of Muslims) in European cities today.

Check out the stats on rapes of native-born European women by Muslim immigrants in European cities like Oslo, Stockholm, Amsterdam. It's shocking...and on the increase.

I'll try to find something to document that when I get a minute.

Edit: One place to get info like that is Bruce Bawer's excellent book "While Europe Slept". Bawer is a gay American writer who moved to Oslo several years ago in hopes of finding a place more hospitable to his homosexuality than what he perceived America to be. As you might imagine, Oslo and the rest of Europe is increasingly more hostile to gays as Muslim immigration increases. Then there's the heterosexual rape problem.

Last edited by danwismar on Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

I deliberately chose a right link, a left link and a cehter-left link. They all report the same story, the same way.

This is not a partisan issue. What I see is an issue of nationalism vs imperialism. Let me not equivicate. Collectively, culturally and socially I do not like these people or what they stand for in general. If they want to emmigarate, fine. I have nothing against individuals who are trying to escape, just as the eastern europeans did from communism. But if you come here, don't give me your liberal multicultural BS conceling your backward ancient prejudices and ignorance. Westernize.

In my mind, clearly there is linkage to the nature of this event and Ziner's POV that democracy as we might define it in a western enlightened sense is able to take root in the ME. So I introduced it. Peeker, I really think there is a ton of common ground I find with Ziner and OJ. Go back and look at the majority of posts, at least lately. But it is hard to thread on that. So we focus on the points of differentiation. They both make me think. Neither are righty whack jobs. But to deny that the internets are not havens for extremists is not reality; at leats to me.

I do not see partisanship here on this one. None at all. Impossible to tell at this point what is busting balls from actual discussion and itent, and I really have no interest in the devo given the nature of the subject. But it is NHB'd so no cryin'. So here's my chips on this one. Fold. I'll be back on the next hand. Deal me in.

jb wrote: Peeker, I really think there is a ton of common ground I find with Ziner and OJ. Go back and look at the majority of posts, at least lately. But it is hard to thread on that. So we focus on the points of differentiation.

Fair point and I agree on that.

I do not see partisanship here on this one. None at all. Impossible to tell at this point what is busting balls from actual discussion and itent, and I really have no interest in the devo given the nature of the subject. But it is NHB'd so no cryin'.

As I said, I wasn't intending to come off as crying about it. It's not at all just here where this phenomena (however much it is a perceived phenomena in my head) occurs but with friends in all walks of life, at work, at the racquetball courts, in the woods, etc. where people seem to pick a side and rhetoric that supports their world-view. Could very well be that it's my perception that's skewed. Maybe I tend to avoid NHB because I'm simply not built for it and I'm unwilling to put in the time when to me it seems too far gone.

The article below (2006) says the rape rate in Oslo is six times that of New York City. The YouTube linked above from 2010 says that of 41 reported rapes in Oslo over some given time period...ALL of them were committed by Muslim immigrants.

Tens of thousands of young Muslim males with a bad case of culturally-reinforced sexual repression move to Sweden (or Norway or Denmark). What could go wrong?

This paragraph sort of gets to the nub of the problem. They were asking for it...you understand...

Two out of three charged with rape in Norway’s capital are immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. The number of rape cases is also rising steadily. Unni Wikan, a professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, in 2001 said that “Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes” because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. The professor’s conclusion was not that Muslim men living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite: “Norwegian women must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.”

Make of it what you will. I realize this is a bit off-topic.

Last edited by danwismar on Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:23 pm, edited 5 times in total.

"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

You give the lowest of us too much credit. If this becomes a daily occurrence you win, until then I will just continue to show how civilized we are.

Quick shout back....

Dunno how sub-cultures that degrade women and glorify violence that are actively (arrests, condemnation) opposed by the mass-culture in the rare incidents that occur can be used as example of reletivity to a mass-culture that degrades women and glorifies violence. Can't get there from here.

Now give me Tailhook as an example and I have a much bigger problem shutting down your argument in my mind.

jb wrote: Peeker, I really think there is a ton of common ground I find with Ziner and OJ. Go back and look at the majority of posts, at least lately. But it is hard to thread on that. So we focus on the points of differentiation.

Fair point and I agree on that.

I do not see partisanship here on this one. None at all. Impossible to tell at this point what is busting balls from actual discussion and itent, and I really have no interest in the devo given the nature of the subject. But it is NHB'd so no cryin'.

As I said, I wasn't intending to come off as crying about it. It's not at all just here where this phenomena (however much it is a perceived phenomena in my head) occurs but with friends in all walks of life, at work, at the racquetball courts, in the woods, etc. where people seem to pick a side and rhetoric that supports their world-view. Could very well be that it's my perception that's skewed. Maybe I tend to avoid NHB because I'm simply not built for it and I'm unwilling to put in the time when to me it seems too far gone.

nah - nah, I meant any disingagement on my part wasn't cryin'. not you.

To me peeker you seem like part of the growing number of Americans who are sick & tired of politics being put front & center in our lives on a daily bases when politics rarely offers a solution to pressing needs. Not to mention how short sighted politics can make us and how far from our focus and priorities it can take us.

You strike me as a clean up your own backyard first kind of guy, so it makes sense to me that the global political scene interests you about as much as seeing the Tribe get no hit.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:More than enough that getting involved and hoping to instill a democracy won't fix em. It is a shame that Lara went there to do her job and then ends up becoming a victim of the violence. Personally I've never understood why so many reporters go to these places in the name of reporting news, when what goes on over in that part of the world is the farthest thing from "news" you can find.

lol wut?

WTF are you babbling about?

"Durr I don't understand why reporters go to where the news is to do their job HURRRRR, I GOTS A WOODEN SPOON dur".

OMG TEH SO CRAZY.

Same reason they went to Juarez to cover the war zone down there, because that's where the action is..-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the whole Muslim/Europe/Rape thing, Europe knew who these people where and what they believed before they started importing boatloads of them. White Traditional Europe is dying, they don't have the birth rates to even fill their most basic labor needs, so they turned to the ME and impoverished opressive countries to fill the void, thinking these people had been trained up real docile like.

FUDU wrote:More than enough that getting involved and hoping to instill a democracy won't fix em. It is a shame that Lara went there to do her job and then ends up becoming a victim of the violence. Personally I've never understood why so many reporters go to these places in the name of reporting news, when what goes on over in that part of the world is the farthest thing from "news" you can find.

lol wut?

WTF are you babbling about?

"Durr I don't understand why reporters go to where the news is to do their job HURRRRR, I GOTS A WOODEN SPOON dur".

OMG TEH SO CRAZY.

Same reason they went to Juarez to cover the war zone down there, because that's where the action is..-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the whole Muslim/Europe/Rape thing, Europe knew who these people where and what they believed before they started importing boatloads of them. White Traditional Europe is dying, they don't have the birth rates to even fill their most basic labor needs, so they turned to the ME and impoverished opressive countries to fill the void, thinking these people had been trained up real docile like.

Wrong.

Enjoy your crazy Muslims.

The Juarez thing is on its way to working itself out.

It seems to me the cartels have killed off nearly all the cops, much of the military and a good portion of innocent civilians. You go in there now and shoot whatever moves and you're probably batting .700 on the killing of criminals thing.

Sure, a few civilians will die but they were either going to be killed by the cartels or be forced to join them at some point.

Then you can install whoever you want to make sure the drugs still get here but the US gets a bigger slice of the pie.

jb wrote:And Brian, I get the "too soon" angle. I will not get into that with you. But this is a political matter by the very nature of the who, what, when and where. To deny so is just not a realistic proposition -- amorally. This will swing US public opinion.

Y'all have a good one.

I understand it's a political issue. It's just unsettling to me to me that it immediately invokes partisan opinions.

Always seems no one on either side is wrong and, worse yet, it should be simple, straight forward and easy for the other side to understand. The fact they can't makes them less intelligent and/or relevant politically.

Y'all clearly have defined beliefs and positions. They're on opposite sides of the political fence. You're both intelligent dudes. But I'll say it again, everyone is screaming over the din.

Honestly, this is exactly the reason I stay out of this forum for the most part and out of politics publicly. Two people who can agree on most things can't seem to listen. It's just always loud. And at some point people look to the extreme to paint someone else's view points and lift their own. Just never seems to lead anywhere.

Microcosm.

Sorry, not trying to dissuade people from conversation or be a pollyanna. Just think that conversation actually takes listening and accommodation and that doesn't appear possible re: politics.

It's tic-tac-toe.

Shit, like you on the Cavaliers forum...

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

motherscratcher wrote:You know what Ziner? I agree that this Rosen guy is a douche of epic proportions based on those tweets.

But why is it "gotta love liberals"? Like his being a liberal or a democrat is what makes him an asshole. Even in the story you quoted it's "left-wing journalist." As if it's a dirty word or something, being "left-wing".

Can't an asshole just be an asshole without implying that his political affiliation is what caused said assholery?

In other words, if the guy that made those tweets was a Fox news correspondant and Hannity's golf buddy, would you have written "gotta love conservatives" and called him a "right-wing journalist"?

Mother, god damn you, it was in jest. But you also clearly demonstrated my point to JB. Clearly I don't think all liberals mock rape, but clearly JB thinks that all Egyptians are rapid beasts that will rape women. Don't judge the many by the few. It was part of my point, sorry if that wasn't clear.

Sorry Ziner. I wasn't trying to call you out in particular. Just pointing out I hate it when someone on the right starts off any and all points with the old "left-wing" guy said/thinks this or that, as if we can already assume he's a moron and an idiot before considering his point of view. You have to admit, it happens constantly.

I did miss your jest, though, so sorry about that. FTR, I didn't think any less you you.

No big deal, it drives me nuts as well, that is why I do it often... if that makes sense.

I am a firm believer that if you agree with everything an entire party platform you have never thought for yourself. I generally vote GOP in national elections, but that does not mean I believe all of what they do, hell I don't even know if I believe in half, I just know that the order in which I rank my issues the GOP wins out. I have no issue with gay marriage if it was nationwide tomorrow, I would even vote for it if it were a straight up sole issue, I just don't care as much about that issue as I do with other issues.

< ------------ Is actualy a fan of the old school real-cons like cal, throw-the-ball george & patrick. They always make me think and I end up agreeing with them more than I would have admitted 20 years ago.

My fav excerpts for you:

The fanatics know how to “play” the West, using images and words such as “freedom” and “liberation” to make us think they mean what we mean by those words.

Douglas Schoen has advised four Israeli prime ministers, as well as the prime minister of Turkey. In a commentary for Foxnews.com, Schoen writes he believes there is “at least a 50 percent chance, if not more, that a candidate from the Muslim Brotherhood or a party with a generally similar approach and orientation will win the next presidential election.”

Last edited by jb on Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Speaking of old-school real-cons, JB...I had occasion to read today (for the second time, I think) Jeanne Kirkpatrick's famous 1979 essay "Dictatorships and Double Standards", written back in a time when our foreign policy concerns were Iran and Nicaragua, and which is strikingly applicable to today's situation(s).

The comparison of the Egyptian revolt to the American Revolution is a silly one...(which was Cal's point).....Seems to me that Iran in 1979 is a much more apt comparison...a corrupt autocrat, friendly to the US, ousted by populist revolt...you know the rest.

What struck me about the article (which is excellent throughout, BTW) was one paragraph that I thought said very well what you were getting at earlier in the thread about democracy...or "representative government" being so much more than elections...how it takes years of institution-building...the slow building of respect for rule of law....painful mistakes, and the eventual emergence of protections for minorities and dissenters, and all the rest. And how long that process took, even in the countries where we now take democracy for granted...excerpting...

In the relatively few places where they exist, democratic governments have come into being slowly, after extended prior experience with more limited forms of participation during which leaders have reluctantly grown accustomed to tolerating dissent and opposition, opponents have accepted the notion that they may defeat but not destroy incumbents, and people have become aware of government’s effects on their lives and of their own possible effects on government. Decades, if not centuries, are normally required for people to acquire the necessary disciplines and habits. In Britain, the road from the Magna Carta to the Act of Settlement, to the great Reform Bills of 1832, 1867, and 1885, took seven centuries to traverse. American history gives no better grounds for believing that democracy comes easily, quickly, or for the asking. A war of independence, an unsuccessful constitution, a civil war, a long process of gradual enfranchisement marked our progress toward constitutional democratic government. The French path was still more difficult. Terror, dictatorship, monarchy, instability, and incompetence followed on the revolution that was to usher in a millennium of brotherhood. Only in the 20th century did the democratic principle finally gain wide acceptance in France and not until after World War II were the principles of order and democracy, popular sovereignty and authority, finally reconciled in institutions strong enough to contain conflicting currents of public opinion.

It's ever more striking to me how rare and unique (and thus how valuable and worth preserving) is a truly free country...in the entire history of man. We could still blow it.

"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

It's ever more striking to me how rare and unique (and thus how valuable and worth preserving) is a truly free country...in the entire history of man. We could still blow it.

I had the exact same thoughts while thinking about where this wave could all go and contrasting to the US.

I completely agree with the point that the theoretical move to what we might one day recognize as advanced first-world western democracy is not something that happens overnight. I just look at the ME and see it as decades if not centuries away. I also see no inevitability to the process of arrivng at western democracy, and it could just linger as a theocracy indefinately. It is not anything we as American imperialists (by means of our multinational corporations having a need to extend stability if not control) could devliver as a turn key solution out of a box, and hence my disdain for the billions and billions of dolars wasted in this misguided effort. Truth be told, I am far more irritated by this foreign welfare than intra-mural welfare, and that's what this is in my mind. Both are killing us, Dan. Killing us. And putting the underpinnings of what you cite in jepardy. I just don't think long-term you can blow away the economic social contract that has been American for so long of it's century of hegemony and expect that to continue. This is due to the need of an involved citizenry that believes more or less in the legitimacy of the government and consents and participates.

First, foreign aid is absolutely dwarfed by internal welfare. It is of course arguable that this is the way it should be. But both breed dependence on the government, and in that sense, are equally malign influences. Not sure what the total of our foreign aid is, but it can't be 1% of our total federal spending.

Just looked it up...it's approximately $15 billion, about 1/3 of which goes to Israel and Egypt (or so it says at the link). But $15 bil is a rounding error in our fed spending today...less than 1/2 of 1% if my math is right.

Not sure about Egypt, but a great deal of the aid we give to Israel is spent by them on US-made military gear, so it comes right back to us in jobs and dollars.

I favor ending corporate welfare of all types...agriculture especially. It hurts more than it helps...a net negative. Ethanol subsidies are causing international food shortages and price spikes. Even AlGore admits its a farce now. It is my understanding that we have more employees in the Dept of Agriculture than we do farmers...which is just fucking insane.

"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

First, foreign aid is absolutely dwarfed by internal welfare. It is of course arguable that this is the way it should be. But both breed dependence on the government, and in that sense, are equally malign influences. Not sure what the total of our foreign aid is, but it can't be 1% of our total federal spending.

Just looked it up...it's approximately $15 billion, about 1/3 of which goes to Israel and Egypt (or so it says at the link). But $15 bil is a rounding error in our fed spending today...less than 1/2 of 1% if my math is right.

Not sure about Egypt, but a great deal of the aid we give to Israel is spent by them on US-made military gear, so it comes right back to us in jobs and dollars.

I favor ending corporate welfare of all types...agriculture especially. It hurts more than it helps...a net negative. Ethanol subsidies are causing international food shortages and price spikes. Even AlGore admits its a farce now. It is my understanding that we have more employees in the Dept of Agriculture than we do farmers...which is just fucking insane.

Dan, my issue isn't "foreign aid" per se.

It is the wars of the otts that never end. It is an over-developed military that holds the corporate empire in place for the venefits of a very few. We just can't afford them anymore.

No argument that the Pentagon needs to take a haircut along with the rest of the government.

But color me just slightly less cynical than you and others about what drives our projection of power in the world. Your angle is that we are in Iraq to benefit Northrup-Grumman, GE and Halliburton, "the corporate empire", (who somehow get portrayed as "cronies" of Republicans but rarely as the patrons of Democrats). I will cling to the belief that we are a bit more high-minded than that.

Take a step back from the ME, and look at our history of nation-building in South Korea, Japan and Germany, where we still maintain hugely expensive troop presences and military installations...but essentially serve at the pleasure of those host democracies, which we built up from the ashes of war....and continue to protect precisely because there are still regional threats to those democracies (less so in Germany, clearly...so why are we still spending billions there? If it's cost-cutting we're after let's start with closing European, not Middle Eastern military operations)

You can give GWB as much or as little credit as you like for it, but he said in 2003 that a liberated Iraq might serve as example of how the Arab world aspires to, and is capable of self-government. Obviously it is yet to be determined how that little experiment is going to play out, but it does appear that there is something of a domino effect going on, and that the universal human aspiration for freedom is not something that has passed over the Middle East.

We agree that it will take decades if not centuries. That much is not really debatable.

"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken